Tag Archives: California High-Speed Rail

High-Speed Rail Failures Continue, With Your Money

Posted on by
California High-Speed Rail: The End of the Line (Literally)

Twelve years have passed since 53% of California voters authorized the state to borrow $9.95 billion from bond investors to start building a high-speed rail system.

And six years have passed since politicians and leaders of powerful construction and transportation interests gathered in Fresno to sign a rail and celebrate the start of actual construction.

So when can we buy tickets for high-speed transportation to San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Sacramento? No one knows. The program continues with minimal accountability or legitimate oversight. No contract has been awarded to lay any rail.

In 2020, the California High-Speed Rail Authority couldn’t even submit a final revised business plan to the state legislature, as required by law. Like so many other alleged taxpayer protections, that requirement was meaningless.

Yet a constant flurry of construction activity continues anyway between Madera and Shafter. Money is being spent – your money.

Far away from the coastal cities and the capital, San Joaquin Valley residents recognize that passenger train operations of any kind aren’t happening any time soon. It appears the California High-Speed Rail Authority is simply marking its territory with unsightly swatches of cleared land and destruction of family homes along the first segment of the rail alignment.

Viaducts over roads and rivers appear intermittently for 190 miles on flat farmland, but that’s far short of the promise to voters of a “Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train.”

When voters approved Proposition 1A in 2008, they were told trains would run between major cities (including Sacramento and San Diego) at 220 miles per hour. In addition, trains would travel between San Francisco and Los Angeles in 2 hours, 40 minutes or less.

At the current rate of progress, a dedicated Amtrak rail line may operate between Merced and Wasco by 2030. If all goes well, trains will be pulled by diesel locomotives that can reach speeds of 125 miles per hour.

This outcome could have been achieved if the State of California had simply retrofitted the existing Amtrak line that already serves the San Joaquin Valley. It would have avoided environmental and community disruption and destruction, while costing billions of dollars less.

Considering the dismal outlook for California High-Speed Rail, it’s no surprise the State of California has failed to obtain private investment for it – another empty promise made to voters in 2008. Only the politicians are willing to spend money – someone else’s money – on this obviously unprofitable project destined never to cross or penetrate a mountain range.

On a few occasions, some federal and state officials have attempted to impose some accountability on the state’s high-speed rail program. Most notably, the Trump Administration sent a letter to the State of California in 2019 cancelling $929 million in federal grant money for California High-Speed Rail and demanding return of a $2.5 billion federal grant awarded ten years ago through President Obama’s economic stimulus package. That money came with reasonable guidelines and conditions that the state has proven incapable of achieving.

The state hasn’t returned the $2.5 billion, of course. And the Biden Administration will probably neglect this federal demand or withdraw it altogether. Even our own Governor Gavin Newsom, after seemingly recognizing the infeasibility of the project early in his administration, has failed to meaningfully respond during his term to continued failures of the high-speed rail program.

How can Californians expect anything better? A cynic would conclude that the real purpose of the California High-Speed Rail project is political. It gives elected officials a continual opportunity to reward construction-related companies and labor unions for their consistent campaign support. That’s why planning and construction goes on despite common sense and the resentment of many California residents.

###

SAFE (Save Angeles Forest for Everyone) Asks U.S. Attorney General for Federal Investigation of California High-Speed Rail

Posted on by

This June 14, 2019 letter from S.A.F.E. (Save Angeles Forest for Everyone) to U.S. Attorney General William Barr wraps up its arguments with this conclusion: “Simply put, a federal grand jury needs to be impaneled to unravel this ball of yarn.”

Save Angeles Forest for Everyone (SAFE) – Letter on California High-Speed Rail to U.S. Attorney General – June 14, 2019

Sources of Information on Termination of Federal Funding Agreement on California High-Speed Rail

Posted on by

The Federal Railroad Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation has posted on its website a compilation of documents related to its decision to terminate its funding agreement with the California High-Speed Rail Authority. You can find the list posted with any documents released on May 16, 2019 on the Federal Railroad Administration eLibrary. CCHSRA has also posted the list below.

The Federal Railroad Administration press release below summarizes the current situation:

After careful consideration, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has terminated Cooperative Agreement No. FR-HSR-0118-12-01-01 (the FY10 Agreement) with the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), and will deobligate the $928,620,000 in funding under that agreement.

The decision follows FRA’s Notice of Intent to Terminate and consideration of the information provided by CHSRA on March 4, 2019. FRA finds that CHSRA has repeatedly failed to comply with the terms of the FY10 Agreement and has failed to make reasonable progress on the Project.

Additionally, California has abandoned its original vision of a high-speed passenger rail service connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles, which was essential to its applications for FRA grant funding.

FRA continues to consider all options regarding the return of $2.5 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds awarded to CHSRA.

Links:

Press Release: Statement of Federal Railroad Administration on Termination of Fiscal Year 2010 Grant Agreement with California High-Speed Rail Authority

Termination Letter from Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to California High-Speed Rail Authority – May 16, 2019

Exhibit A: Fiscal Year 2010 Agreement, as amended

Exhibit B: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Notice of Intent to Terminate Cooperative Agreement – February 19, 2019

Exhibit C: California High-Speed Rail Authority Letter to Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Administrator Ronald L. Batory – March 4, 2019

Exhibit D: California High-Speed Rail Authority Letter to Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Director of Program Delivery, Jamie Rennert – March 4, 2019

Exhibit E: Final California High-Speed Rail Authority 2019 Project Update Report

Exhibit F: California High-Speed Rail Authority Fiscal Year 2010 Application

Exhibit G: Funding Contribution Plan Correspondence

Exhibit H: Detailed Quarterly Budget Correspondence

Exhibit I: Project Management Plan Correspondence

Exhibit J: Annual Work Plan Correspondence

Efficient High-Speed Rail Travel Between Gilroy and Palmdale: Is It Worth $100 Billion?

Posted on by

Financial analyst William Grindley presented his latest study to the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) board at its January 15, 2019 meeting. On behalf of the people of California and the United States, he argues yet again that this project – the costliest infrastructure project in human history – is a waste of money and needs to be terminated, immediately.

The new study is If You Build It, They Will Not Come – The Sequel – The Findings and Consequences of Competitive Analyses of HSR Versus Auto and Air Travel – 2029-2040. It debunks the claims of the California High-Speed Rail Authority about future ridership – and future revenue.

Mr. Grindley (with coauthor William Warren) makes a reasonable assumption that the Authority chooses to ignore: Californians (even California state legislators) will continue to drive or fly between California cities, rather than taking high-speed rail, if driving or flying takes less time and costs less, which it does on the vast majority of high-speed rail routes.

Using CHSRA data and mathematical formulas, Grindley and Warren analyzed three-fourths of all travel routes possible on the future rail system for the first operational segment (140 routes) and possible for Phase 1 (an additional 180 routes). Their calculations show that only one of those high-speed rail routes would have total travel time and total travel cost that are less than flying or driving: the route between Gilroy and Palmdale. Based on these results, Mr. Grindley concludes that the Authority’s estimates for ridership are five times higher than what would be expected if people make rational transportation decisions based on the time and cost of travel.

They also consider the claims of Silicon Valley high-speed rail promoters that people will use the bullet train to commute between homes in the Central Valley and workplaces in Silicon Valley. Mr. Grindley calculates travel times and concludes the proposed high-speed rail link is absurd and connecting the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) train with high-speed rail at Merced is even more absurd.

What we’ll get for $100 billion are higher fares, longer travel times, and government subsidies a few riders for a poorly thought out travel mode.

Source Documents

The New Report by Grindley and Warren: If You Build It, They Will Not Come – The Sequel – The Findings and Consequences of Competitive Analyses of HSR Versus Auto and Air Travel – 2029-2040

Slideshow for California High-Speed Rail Authority – January 15, 2019

Public Comment at January 15, 2019 California High-Speed Rail Authority Board Meeting

Press Release/Summary

Detailed Analysis of Silicon Valley – Central Valley California High-Speed Rail Routes Routes

Detailed Analysis of San Francisco – Los Angeles (Phase 1) California High-Speed Rail Routes

All Documents and Referenced Materials Used in Grindley and Warren Report

——-

Previous Reports by Grindley and Warren on Aspects of the California High Speed Rail’s Finances

Previous Financial Reports about California High-Speed Rail by Grindley and Warren

###

As Expected, Cost Soars for First Construction Segment of California High-Speed Rail

Posted on by

Everyone knew it was coming – even the board and top executives of California High-Speed Rail Authority.

At the Authority’s January 16, 2018 board meeting, board members received a “Central Valley Cost Update” presentation. The news was – as usual – bad.

The Madera to Fresno first construction segment is now $1.2 billion higher than the original estimate. And the Fresno to Kern County second and third construction segments are now $700 million higher than the original estimate. While the source of the additional costs has not been explicitly laid out, it is suspected to be due to delays. The longer a project runs the more money has to be spent on matters like construction vehicles, temporary fencing, hoarders, worker facilities, and other equipment that is typical for construction projects like this. Some observers hope that these additional costs don’t lead to the workers having to rush to complete the job in as little time as possible. Rushing on construction sites can lead to workers suffering serious injuries. Fortunately, construction accident law firms can help should a situation like this arise. However, if a professional construction company who are knowledgable on the dangers of these sites and how to stay safe is employed to do this job, it’s unlikely accidents will occur. Construction companies like Rickabaugh Construction ensure that the work is not rushed and done professionally and makes sure safety is a top priority. This can mean from the planning of the eventual construction to the equipment/products that are used, like a backer rod or joint sealants. The safety and security of everything need to be at the forefront of everyone’s minds.

Construction Package 1 (with Highway 99 improvements) is now estimated to cost $3.4 billion. Few people remember the public relations bonanza for the California High-Speed Rail Authority in June 2013, when the Authority board awarded that package at the low, low bid of $985 million. (Approved change orders for that contract as of November 30, 2017 have already increased the project cost by $355.6 million.)

The total estimated cost of the Initial Construction Segment (Madera to Shafter) is now $10.6 billion. And this is the cheap, easy part of the route: flat farmland.

Few people remember that in November 2008 voters approved Proposition 1A and authorized the state to borrow $9.95 billion to get the project underway. Some of that money was spent in other parts of the state on planning and “connectivity projects” such as train cars for the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) district.

In the meantime, Governor Jerry Brown and the governing majority in the California state legislature continue to support the project. Repeated efforts by Assemblyman Jim Patterson to initiate audits of the California High-Speed Rail Authority have failed to pass the Joint Legislative Audit Committee. Lobbyists for big corporations and labor unions boost the project, in defiance of reality.

Meanwhile, Citizens for California High-Speed Rail Accountability (CCHSRA) continues to pursue its lawsuit contending that the Authority has failed to comply with Proposition 1A. But as construction creeps forward through prime farmland and quiet agricultural communities (yes, land is already being torn up), cost overruns – or a fiscally responsible new Governor – may stop the project before the courts do.

PRIMARY SOURCES

California High-Speed Rail Authority Central Valley Cost Update – January 16, 2018

Construction Package 1 (CP-1) Monthly Status Report Through November 30, 2017

SAMPLE OF NEWS MEDIA REPORTS

California Bullet Train Cost Surges by $2.8 Billion: ‘Worst-Case Scenario Has Happened’ – Los Angeles Times – January 16, 2018

Is High-Speed Rail Dying? This Could Be a Crucial Year for the Troubled Project – Fresno Bee – January 18, 2018

California High-Speed Rail Authority Hasn’t Planted Any Trees (December 16, 2015)

Posted on by

Citizens for California High Speed Rail Accountability (CCHSRA) co-chairman Frank Oliveira was interviewed for an investigative news story about another failure of the California High-Speed Rail Authority to fulfill its commitments. KCRA Channel 3 in Sacramento broadcast the story on December 8, 2015.

In June 2013, the California High-Speed Rail Authority produced a report for the state legislature as required by Senate Bill 1029, which was signed into law by Governor Brown in 2012. Entitled Contribution of the High-Speed Rail Program to Reducing California’s Greenhouse Gas Emission Levels, this report was supposed to analyze the net impact of the high speed rail system on the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.

It promised “zero net emissions” during construction by offsetting equipment and material production emissions with programs such as irrigation pump replacement, new tractors for farmers, new buses for school districts, and a tree-planting program. According to the report introduction by chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, “The analysis of GHG emission reductions in the Authority’s report clearly demonstrates that the high-speed rail project will be an important part of meeting California’s overall climate goals.”

This report also helped to justify the decision of Governor Brown and the California legislature to keep the project alive through annual budget appropriations derived from Cap-and-Trade auction revenue. Construction of the high-speed rail system was not supposed to contribute to climate change. All pollution would be offset by other activities.

Almost a year after the ceremonial groundbreaking in Fresno, KCRA reporter David Bienick looked into the tree planting program. In response to a question asked with a camera running, California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Jeff Morales admitted that not one tree had been planted. Morales had claimed in 2014 testimony to legislative committees and in other presentations that 5,000 trees would be planted to achieve the “zero net emissions.”

This KCRA story turned to CCHSRA leadership for commentary:

Frank Oliviera on California High-Speed Rail Tree Planting

Frank Oliviera speaks about the absurdity of the California High-Speed Rail tree-planting program.

Frank Oliveira of the group Citizens for California High-Speed Rail Accountability said some studies have shown the state will need to plant 5 million trees.

“Where are they going to put 5 million trees and keep them alive? Who’s going to take care of those trees? How much is that going to cost to take care of those trees?” Oliveira said.

Read the article and see the video here: High-Speed Rail’s Tree-Planting Plan Slow to Start: Nearly a Year After Groundbreaking, Not a Single Tree Planted.

Also, see the CCHSRA letter to the California Air Resources Board about the appropriateness of using Cap-and-Trade auction proceeds to fund California High-Speed Rail construction: Questioning the Outlandish Idea That California High-Speed Rail Deserves Cap-and-Trade Funds.

An April 2014 article published by the California Policy Center suggested that the tree-planting plan and other “schemes” to achieve zero net emissions were “farcical.” See California High Speed Rail’s Dubious Claims of Environmental Benefits.

Rebutting Claims About California High-Speed Rail as a Highway and Airport Alternative

Posted on by

Below is a summary (abstract) of a report submitted to the California High-Speed Rail Authority board by Mark R. Powell of Against California High Speed Rail at the board’s November 9, 2015 meeting.

Pushing Back on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s Myths About High-Speed Rail

24,300 Miles of Highway Lanes as an Alternative to High-Speed Rail
by Mark R. Powell
October 30, 2015

The Authority’s most recent hyping of the need for high-speed rail, a June 2015 brochure entitled California High-Speed Rail Big Picture (2015), makes the claim that Phase 1 Blended, connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles, provides a transportation capacity equivalent to 4,300 new highway lane miles, 115 additional airport gates, and four new airport runways costing $158 billion. A second claim is that high-speed rail provides this capacity at half the cost.

This paper dissects these deceptive claims where the Authority uses “capacity” instead of “ridership” knowing full well that the theoretical capacity of Phase 1 Blended will dwarf its ridership and that the itemized highway lane miles will not be necessary this century, if ever, whether Phase 1 Blended is built or not built.

The paper then traces the evolution over two decades of the asserted highway benefits of high-speed rail, from the thousands of miles of highway lanes reported in the Authority’s 2005 California High-Speed Train Final Program EIR/EIS, back to earlier minimal assertions made in its first business plan and those made by its predecessor, the Intercity High-Speed Rail Commission.

Lastly, this paper looks at California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) traffic data and Caltrans long range planning documents. The data and planning documents prove how the Authority grossly overestimated future highway infrastructure needs for the year 2016 in its 2005 California High-Speed Train Final Program EIR/EIS and attempts to give readers information sufficient to see for themselves high-speed rail’s true impact on future highway needs over the next 20 years.

Read the full report at the California High-Speed Rail Authority website at Pushing Back on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s Myths About High-Speed Rail or at the Citizens for California High-Speed Rail Accountability website at Pushing Back on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s Myths About High-Speed Rail.

###

Voters Can Set California Priorities Straight: Water In, Train Out

Posted on by
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Aaron Fukuda, 559-707-8928 or cchsraorg [at] gmail.com

Voters Get Opportunity to Set California Priorities Straight – Water In, Train Out

 

(Hanford, California, Thursday, November 12, 2015) – The voters of California now have an opportunity to determine where the priorities of California need to be in the near future. Board of Equalization Vice Chair George Runner and Senator Bob Huff have submitted a voter initiative to the Attorney General that could be placed on the 2016 Election. This initiative will give voters a choice to take unused bonding capacity from the California High Speed Rail Project (HSR Project) authorized under Proposition 1A and put it towards water infrastructure projects that are vitally need to meet the current water needs of the State and to prevent social and economic impacts when the next drought strikes California.

This initiative comes at a critical point in the HSR Project as the California High Speed Rail Authority (Authority) has made very little progress on the project and numerous questions of legitimacy surround the Authority and the HSR Project. To fund water projects in California, the initiative seeks to redirect unused HSR funds from the project that were authorized by the voters in 2008 under Proposition 1A. The Authority has spent eight years trying to develop a project that meets Proposition 1A’s requirements, and both the courts and the public have highlighted numerous shortcomings that have kept the Authority and the State from issuing Proposition 1A bonds.

More recently, the Authority came under fire for withholding key documents that showed that the 2014 Business Plan that was presented to the California Legislature was based on artificially low values, and the project will likely exceed the budget set forth in 2014. The Authority also received proposals from 36 international companies that specialize in high-speed rail projects, most of which told the Authority that private funding was not coming to the rescue and that the approach planned by the HSR Authority is not technically or financially feasible.

The Democratic Party-controlled California Legislature, charged with the responsibility to oversee the HSR Project, has refused to appropriately address concerns and has opted instead to loosen oversight of the project. Recently, Assembly Speaker Tony Atkins responded to a request to investigate the Authority for withholding documents by brushing off the severity of the incident and emphasizing “broader range of oversight in 2016.” Earlier in the year the legislature passed Assembly Bill 95, which eliminated the requirement for the Authority to produce and submit key progress reports and reduced the frequency that the Authority produced and submitted project and financial reports.

A large majority of voters of California are tired of watching communities, farms and businesses struggle with the lack of water while a rogue agency like the California High Speed Rail Authority and the Legislature mismanages their multi-billion dollar project. We hope that in 2016 voters will send a message to the Governor and the California Legislature that we can and will set water as our priority in the State of California and hold our public agencies accountable for the use of our limited tax dollars.

###

Voters Get Opportunity to Set California Priorities Straight – Water In, Train Out

Assembly Speaker Must Strengthen High-Speed Rail Oversight

Posted on by

See a copy of this letter: CCHSRA Letter Dated November 10, 2015 to Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins on Inadequate California High-Speed Rail Oversight

November 10, 2015

The Honorable Toni G. Atkins
Speaker of the Assembly
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0078

Dear Speaker Atkins:

We are commenting on your November 3, 2015 letter to Assembly Minority Leader Kristen Olsen about California High-Speed Rail oversight. Your letter claims that legislative oversight of the Authority planned for 2016 will be sufficient, and it rejects a request for the legislature to issue a subpoena to the Authority.

Your response, along with a law enacted in June to reduce legislative oversight, seems to indicate that the legislative branch is essentially in cahoots with the administration of Governor Brown in limiting public scrutiny of this troubled mega-project. By declining legislative oversight of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, you are evading an uncomfortable political reality and depending on the courts to reveal the truth about the status of this project.

Our extensive interaction during the past five years with the California High-Speed Rail Authority has revealed the agency’s culture. It works to conceal documents that contradict its public statements, its business plans, and other reports provided to the legislature.

It’s understandable why the California High-Speed Rail Authority avoids accountability. It cannot possibly comply with Proposition 1A. We urge you to reverse your position and take extraordinary means to obtain internal documents and public testimony from officials of the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

Our Experience with the California High-Speed Rail Authority

Citizens for California High Speed Rail Accountability (CCHSRA) was formed in 2011 by farmers, small business owners, and other residents of Kings County and rural Fresno County. It was a response to the lack of public accountability we observed firsthand from the California High-Speed Rail Authority as they planned the rail alignment through our rural agricultural communities.

Our introduction to the Authority gave us a foreshadowing of their typical conduct, which continues today. Representatives of the Authority began trespassing on our properties without notice or permission of the owners. Initially bewildered, we soon discovered these outsiders were assessing our land in preparation for the Authority to take it, either through unfairly low financial offers or through eminent domain.

Meanwhile, the Authority established a rail alignment that literally put the track through the front door and out the back door of the only livestock rendering facility south of Fresno. It was stunning. A conspiracy theorist would conclude that the path was deliberately chosen to undermine the region’s dairy industry and make an ideological statement of some sort.

We perceived the disdain of agency officials for the agricultural life and rural traditions of our community. You may not be aware that most of the 1300 parcel owners now targeted by the California High-Speed Rail Authority are resisting the government appropriation of our land. Every month, the State Public Works Board takes action to obtain that land.

After we became a visible critic of the agency’s conduct, the California High-Speed Rail Authority held some local community meetings devoid of substance in our region. To add to our frustration, someone arranged these meetings to be flooded with union construction workers from outside the area. The Authority briefly opened an office in Hanford (the county seat of Kings County) for community outreach and then shut it down without public notice, perhaps calculating it could better handle the rural communities by crushing us with political power.

For almost five years, our members have met weekly for status updates at the Kings County Farm Bureau office, attended almost every monthly meeting of the Authority board, and studied the legislative-mandated reports and public relations material available to the public. We identified numerous inconsistencies and questionable claims from the Authority to the Kings County Board of Supervisors, the California legislature, and the public. The 2014 Final Business Plan for California High-Speed Rail fails to fulfill statutory requirements and presents a false picture of the program. It’s already woefully out of date.

We hired some lawyers and policy consultants to perform detailed analysis of the performance of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, particularly in relationship to the mandates in Proposition 1A and in state laws implemented in conjunction with Proposition 1A. They confirmed our impression that public accountability is sorely lacking for the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

Some of the most devastating information obtained by Citizens for California High Speed Rail Accountability is only publicly available because of public records requests and off-the-cuff remarks made at board meetings. The discovery of unreleased internal Authority documents by the Los Angeles Times reporter isn’t surprising to us.

A Typical Example of California High-Speed Rail Authority Hiding the Truth

We surmise that your official perspective about the California High-Speed Rail Authority comes primarily from its representatives through communications such as an October 30, 2015 letter to you from the chairperson and the CEO of the California High-Speed Rail Authority. This letter rests on outdated Authority claims such as the June 2013 announcement of bid results for Construction Package 1 (civil engineering work from Madera to Fresno).

Original bidding guidelines for Construction Package 1 emphasized the importance of experience with high-speed rail construction. During the bidding process, the Chairman and the CEO of the Authority – without any public vetting nor board action – changed the bidding rules. In the end, the contract was awarded to Tutor Perini/Zachry/Parsons, a Joint Venture, which had the least amount of experience with high-speed rail construction.

You may not be aware that the California High-Speed Rail Authority has not even advertised a request for bidder qualifications yet for laying track for what is currently the Initial Construction Section (Madera to Shafter). That would be Construction Package 5.

Actual earthwork has recently begun for Construction Package 1, a bid has been awarded for Construction Package 2-3, and bidders have been prequalified for Construction Package 4. Realize that all of this work is merely civil engineering – no track, no electrification, no heavy maintenance facility, no stations – from Madera to Shafter. And Merced and Bakersfield are not incorporated into this work.

As far as electrification work for the genuine high-speed rail capability that voters expected when they voted for Proposition 1A in November 2008, it looks like they will need to settle for eventual electrification of the “bookend” track that the Authority will share with Caltrain commuter service (San Francisco to San Jose). The electrified Initial Operating Segment from Madera or Merced to somewhere in Los Angeles County is essentially a bunch of options drawn on paper.

Behind the Authority’s public relations campaign (funded by a $500,000 item in the fiscal year 2015-16 state budget), the specifics of the project’s outlook are grim.

Oversight of the California High-Speed Rail Authority Has Been Reduced

Perhaps the most egregious act to suppress accountability for the California High-Speed Rail Authority occurred this past summer. Language was inserted into a budget trailer bill (Assembly Bill 95) eliminating the requirement for the Authority to produce and submit some progress reports and reducing the frequency for the Authority to produce and submit other progress reports.

The October 30, 2015 letter to you from California High-Speed Rail top officials states that “the Legislature maintains strong oversight of the High-Speed Rail program through several mechanisms. Senate Bill 1029, which authorized expenditures for the program, contains strict reporting requirements.”

Echoing these comments, you claim in your November 3, 2015 letter that “oversight mechanisms have already been put in place.” Actually, oversight mechanisms are being removed, and you apparently condoned it as Assembly Speaker and voted for it.

We never expected the executive branch to acknowledge the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s lack of public accountability, but we expected the legislative branch to insist on it. Instead, it will be the judicial branch that fulfills its role to serve the people.

In less than six months, the California legislative leadership, the California High-Speed Rail Authority, and Governor Brown will be exposed for concealing the reality of this project. We expect a Sacramento County Superior Court judge will confirm the Authority’s lack of accountability and failure to comply with Proposition 1A through a decision in Tos v. California High-Speed Rail Authority.

Oral arguments are scheduled for February 11, 2016. You still have time to respond to Assemblywoman Olsen’s request and avoid tainting the legislature in the California High-Speed Rail scandal. We urge you to issue a subpoena to the California High-Speed Rail Authority immediately and end its continual deception of the People of California.

Sincerely,

Aaron Fukuda, CCHSRA Co-Chairman
Frank Oliveira, CCHSRA Co-Chairman

Cc:

Assemblywoman Kristen Olsen
Assemblyman Jim Patterson
Assemblyman Tom Lackey
Assemblyman Scott Wilk
Senator Andy Vidak

U.S. House of Representatives Unanimously Passes Amendment Proposed by Congressman Jeff Denham to Nullify California High-Speed Rail Grant Agreement

Posted on by

Congressman Jeff Denham's District

Congressman Jeff Denham’s District

Citizens for California High-Speed Rail Accountability (CCHSRA) received a press release this morning (June 10, 2015) from the office of U.S. Representative Jeff Denham, who represents many residents of the Central Valley concerned about the financial waste, ill-conceived route alignment, and relentless property takings of California High-Speed Rail.

You may thank Congressman Denham via email by going to this website:

https://denham.house.gov/contact-me/email-me

Be especially sure to contact Congressman Denham if you live in his district. See the district map.

In a vote Tuesday evening (June 10, 2015), the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed Congressman Jeff Denham’s amendment to the Fiscal Year 2015-2016 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill nullifying the current grant agreement between the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

“This amendment will finally hold California High-Speed Rail accountable for its finances,” said Rep. Denham. “The project is several decades behind schedule, nearly $70 billion over budget, and will not meet the speeds, travel times, or ridership levels promised to voters. No longer will they be able to accept a hamburger today for payment on Tuesday.”

Specifically, the amendment prohibits any appropriated federal funds from being used for high-speed rail in the state of California or for administering a grant agreement that includes a “tapered” match (described below).

When the Federal Railroad Administration initially awarded the Authority with nearly $3 billion in federal grant dollars under the federal stimulus package, it entered into a standard grant agreement with the Authority requiring a dollar-for-dollar match. This agreement stipulated that for every federal tax dollar spent, the Authority must spend a dollar from a non-federal source. California never came up with the money and subsequently missed payment deadline after payment deadline.

In order to avoid violating the Federal Deficiency Act, the Federal Railroad Administration quietly amended its grant agreement in December 2012 to allow for a tapered match – allowing federal dollars to be spent in advance of any matching dollars – despite having no assurances from the California High-Speed Rail Authority that the matching dollars would ever exist. The FRA’s Inspector General has subsequently criticized FRA for jeopardizing federal taxpayer dollars with this scheme. This amendment guarantees that the FRA must enter into an agreement that requires the Authority to match, dollar-for-dollar, federal tax dollars in current fiscal years.

See Text of Denham Amendment to Nullify the California High-Speed Rail Grant Agreement

Congressman Denham has repeatedly introduced legislation to stop the California High-Speed Rail Authority from continuing to waste billions in taxpayer dollars. In June 2012 and June 2014, he offered an amendment suspending federal funding for California High-Speed Rail. It passed each year. He also successfully added an amendment to the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act (H.R. 7) in February 2012 ensuring that money in highway bills could not be spent on California High-Speed Rail. In January 2014, Rep. Denham introduced the Responsible Rail and Deterring Deficiency Act, which would suspend all federal funding to California High-Speed Rail.

###

« Older Entries